beta
Text
The judgment below
The remainder, excluding the rejection of an application for compensation order, shall be reversed.
Defendant
A. Imprisonment.
Reasons
. The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is just, and there is no error of misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles as alleged by the defendants.
4. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts
A. On November 21, 2011, the Defendants entered into a guarantee agreement with the Korea Housing Guarantee Co., Ltd. and the Korea Housing Guarantee Co., Ltd., and the Korea Housing Guarantee Co., Ltd., and the Korea Housing Guarantee Co., Ltd., to the effect that the seller bears the responsibility for the performance of the sale of housing, the down payment, and the part payment. Accordingly, the Defendants stated that the house guarantee on the announcement of invitation of invitation of invitation of invitation of invitation of invitation of invitation of sale guarantees the down payment and the part payment. On the other hand, the Defendants entered the house guarantee in the sales contract printed in the same letter, and indicated the contents of the guarantee agreement as mentioned above and the trust account (1005-382-048*) in the name of the Korea Housing Co., Ltd., a trust
Nevertheless, the Defendants thought to receive the down payment and intermediate payment from H’s account under the name of H, rather than the said bank account designated by the Housing Guarantee Act, and concluded a sales contract with the victim F who is re-fluence in Bupyeong-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seoul, with the victim F and the 601 room of the said living house in March 15, 2012 in which the Korea Housing Guarantee Act guarantees the performance of sale or the refund of the pre-sale payment, and directed the victim to deposit the down payment and intermediate payment into the bank account in H’s name.
However, the Defendants knew that the sale price paid to an account other than the above trust account as stated in the contract for sale in lots does not have the effect of the guarantee of housing for Korea. However, the Defendants did not intend to implement the guarantee of housing for sale in lots or guarantee the refund of the sale price in accordance with the contract for sale in lots to the victims from March 2012 to June 20 of the same year.